nobody wants these losers anymore...
but i doubt they give a flying f..k.
some say these top-level financial geniuses deserve such obscene riches because they are rare talents demanding top dollar...yeah, they did a fine job.
they should be judged and sentenced not by a jury of their peers (they are peerless, remember? rare and valuable), but by a jury of the investors in the stocks and funds they pillaged.
oh, that's right...they aren't charged with any crime; but if they are anywhere near approaching the savvy savants they were paid to be, then they knowingly pumped zillions of other people's dollars into a market bubble doomed to explode, taking their clients life savings with it...except the nice chunk they kept for themselves...and the only price to pay is a little public derision and maybe a senate hearing just for show; not a bad trade for a million bucks a month for three or so years.
jtc
While the aforementioned half-score losers do indeed appear to be kin of felidae Acinonyx jubatus[1], I have to say that the linked article left a bad taste in my mouth -- and a desire to learn the average pay distribution among competent financial directors of (possibly) lesser genius but of greater stability, integrity and/or moral fiber. [2]
ReplyDeleteIMHO, the "look how much these bozos took home, omg!" theme obsesses on the wrong point (remuneration over three years) and thereby misses the real issue: "This lot tried to be creative about finances, sold a ton of wishful thinking and snake oil, and generally abused the trust of their clients and (indirectly) the faith of investors at large."
____
[1] Them fat cats is a bunch of cheetahs!
[2] Would I begrudge high compensation for a financial near-genius who reliably made money and value grow and multiply? I think not.
"if they are anywhere near approaching the savvy savants they were paid to be, then they knowingly pumped zillions of other people's dollars into a market bubble doomed to explode."
ReplyDeletesays it all, dude...a thief's a thief no matter the gig.